K.S.KUMARAN,J. - (1.) Heard counsel.
(2.) The petitioner-Management has approached this court for quashing the order, Annexure P-4 dated 20.12.2000 directing respondent No. 3 to file the necessary affidavit to the management as contemplated under Rule 14 of The Punjab Privately-Managed Recognised Schools Employees (Security of Service) Rules, 1981. It has also been directed in Annexure P-4 that the management should pay the subsistence allowance within one month from the date of the receipt of the affidavit. Rule 14 of the above-said Rules reads as follows :- "14. Subsistence allowance. - An employee under suspension shall be entitled to an amount of subsistence allowance equivalent to fifty per cent of his basic pay and the allowances admissible thereon from the Managing Committee : Provided that the employee under suspension shall not have his headquarters without the prior approval of his appointing authority and shall submit every month a certificate to the effect that :- (a) he is not employed anywhere gainfully in any capacity; (b) he is not carrying on any business; and (c) he has not left his headquarters without the prior approval of his appointing authority. (2) If the employee is kept under suspension beyond the period of six months under Section 5 of the Act, the subsistence allowance shall be raised to seventy-five per cent of the basic pay and the allowance admissible thereon : Provided that the delay is not due to non-cooperation or negligence of the employee concerned." N So, it is evident from Rule 14, reproduced above that an employee under suspension shall be entitled to subsistence allowance provided he submits every month a certificate to the effect that he is not employed and he is not carrying on any business, and that he has not left the headquarters without prior approval of the opposite party. The fact that respondent No. 3 has not been paid the subsistence allowance is not disputed before us. The only point raised on behalf of the petitioner is that respondent No. 3 has not filed the affidavit as contemplated under Rule 14 of the Punjab Privately Managed Recognised Schools Employees (Security of Service) Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1981 Rules') and respondent No. 3 has retired in the year 1996 and, therefore, he now cannot give such certificate as contemplated under Rule 14.
(3.) The solitary question for consideration is whether the stipulation in the proviso to rule 14(1) of the 1981 Rules requiring an employee to submit a certificate "every month" is mandatory. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a plain reading of the proviso to rule 14(1) of the 1981 Rules is sufficient to show that the aforesaid stipulation is mandatory, whereas respondent No. 3 contends that the same is merely directory.;